Skip to content
US Green Building Council Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

US Green Building Council Inc

To transform how buildings and communities are designed, built, and operated to create thriving, healthy, equitable, and resilient places that advance human and environmental wellbeing.

$192k
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Science & Tech$1.3MEnvironment$630kPublic Benefit$97kEducation$34kCommunity Improvement$25kHousing & Shelter$20k
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $111,100, the rows itemized in this filing. The $192,065 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $80,965 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $10k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $102k
$12,300
Median grant
6
States reached
$40M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY OF JACKSONVILLE$15,100
2030 INC$15,000
CITY OF GARY$12,300
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA$12,300
CITY OF CARROLLTON$12,300
CITY OF GAINESVILLE$12,300
CITY OF EL PASO$12,300
GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA$10,000
CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS$9,500
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 93% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CITY OF SCOTTSDALE: $9k → 11%CITY OF TUCSON AZ: $10k → 15%CITY OF AMESBURY MA: $13k → 10%CITY OF NORTHAMPTON: $8k → 12%SCHOOL OF ENVIRONMENTAL: $8k → 6%CITY OF LA CRESCENT MN: $13k → 8%GARDINER PUBLIC SCHOOL: $34k → 10%STATE COLLEGE BOROUGH PA: $13k → 16%CITY OF PHILADELPHIA: $12k → 22%CITY OF COSTA MESA: $8k → 10%CRADLE TO CRADLE: $1.3M → 10%CITY OF SAN DIEGO: $12k → 11%EREPUBLIC INC: $13k → 12%CITY OF LONG BEACH CA: $14k → 14%CITY OF ITHACA NY: $15k → 16%CITY OF PLANO: $9k → 5%CITY OF CARROLLTON: $12k → 14%CITY OF EL PASO: $12k → 21%2030 INC: $15k → 12%CITY OF COLUMBIA SC: $10k → 16%CITY OF SARASOTA FL: $8k → 9%CITY OF PALM COAST: $12k → 9%CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL FL: $13k → 10%CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH FL: $9k → 11%ORANGE COUNTY FL: $8k → 13%CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS: $10k → 13%CITY OF JACKSONVILLE: $15k → 14%CITY OF DES MOINES: $9k → 10%OAKLAND COUNTY MI: $13k → 8%CITY OF LAWRENCE: $9k → 15%CROSSTOWN BUILDING OWNER LLC: $20k → 17%CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS: $12k → 9%CITY OF GRAND JUNCTION: $12k → 11%CITY OF SOUTH BEND: $12k → 13%CITY OF GARY: $12k → 15%CITY OF DAYTON OH: $13k → 14%CITY OF ISSAQUAH WA: $13k → 9%CITY OF HENDERSON NV: $10k → 13%CITY OF LEXINGTON: $12k → 15%NATIONAL CAUCUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATORS: $20k → 14%TOWN OF LANTANA: $12k → 11%CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE FL: $13k → 13%CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH FL: $9k → 14%CITY OF NORTH MIAMI: $12k → 15%CITY OF DAVIDSON NC: $13k → 10%GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: $11k → 14%GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: $10k → 14%CITY OF CORAL GABLES FL: $9k → 15%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

NH
WA
MT
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
NV
IA
IN
OH
PA
CA
CO
KY
MD
AZ
NM
KS
TN
NC
SC
DC
MS
AL
TX
FL
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

6%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$121k · 5 repeat orgs$2.0M to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
58

Total granted

$121k
$1.9M

Still filing today

0%
9%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 18% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $92k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentEducationCommunity ImprovementSocial ScienceOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • CS
    COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2020–2021 · $49k
  • CO
    City of Colorado Springs Parks Recreation and C
    2× · 2023–2024 · $21k
  • DP
    DC PUBLIC SCHOOLS
    2× · 2023–2024 · $21k

Funded once

  • CT
    CRADLE TO CRADLE PRODUCTS INNOVATIO INSTITUTE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $1.3M · revenue +78% · 51% of their budget
  • GC
    GARDINER COMMUNITY SCHOLARSHIP FUND INC
    one grant, 2017 · $34k
  • NC
    NATIONAL CAUCUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATORSgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue +362%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field
04the grantee network

7 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 7 of the 70 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CRADLE TO CRADLE PRODUCTS INNOVATIO INSTITUTE INC: $1,340,628 · OtherCRADLE TO CRADLE PRODUCTS INNOVATIO INSTITUTE INC+64 more: $748,357 · Other+64 more2030 INC: $15,000 · EnvironmentSCHOOL OF ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $8,000 · EnvironmentNATIONAL CAUCUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATORS: $20,000 · EducationEXPLORE LAWRENCE INC: $9,323 · Community ImprovementPOPULATION CONNECTION: $5,101 · Social Science
Other$2,088,985Environment$23,000Education$20,000Community Improvement$9,323Social Science$5,101

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCRADLE TO CRADLE PRODUCTS INNOVATIO INSTITUTE INC: $1,340,628 over 1y, 51% of budgetNATIONAL CAUCUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATORS: $20,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budget2030 INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetEXPLORE LAWRENCE INC: $9,323 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetDiscover Palm Beach Inc: $8,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPOPULATION CONNECTION: $5,101 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds CRADLE TO CRADLE PRODUCTS INNOVATIO INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL CAUCUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATORS ↗
  • Who funds 2030 INC ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

National Recreation a…Firehouse Subs Public…Cities for Financial …National League of Ci…AARPThe Recycling Partner…Petsmart Charities IncNational Arbor Day Fo…Center for Technology…Urban Sustainability …National Fish and Wil…Florida Humanities Co…
National Recreation and Park AssociationVA40.9× affinity18 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Recreation and Park Association · Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation Inc · Cities for Financial Empowerment Fund Inc · National League of Cities Institute Inc · AARP · The Recycling Partnership Inc · Petsmart Charities Inc · National Arbor Day Foundation · Center for Technology and Civic Life · Urban Sustainability Directors Network · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Florida Humanities Council Inc

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization US Green Building Council Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from US Green Building Council Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to US Green Building Council Inc?

    Find your warmest path to US Green Building Council Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 70 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on US Green Building Council’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home